West Virginia Democrat. [volume] (Charles Town, W. Va.) 1885-1890, 1887-08-26

and the conservative element IN
France did not regain ascendency
until one in every seven'of her pop
ulation had persisted.
Be it understood We are rs mucn
in favor of temperance as the prohf-'
bition leaders; we advocate local OPP
ton: and before this discussion is
ended we will demonstrate that 10
cal option, and not prohibition, is
the true way to lessen the drink evil.
We oppose prohibition because it is
based on doctrine that is fatal to
personal lib, rty. We write as we do,
because in this busy age so few men
pause to reflect on this new danger
that threatens to shake out the very
corner stone of our political system.
The Herald considers Il reference
to the fundamental principle of gov
eminent as irrelevant to the discus
sion, but the circumstance that its
eyes are shut to what is so plain to
others is conclusive proof that it is
blinded by uncalculating fanaticism.
If therefore We succeed in rousing
thoughtful men to proper consid-
Grafton Of this subject we will have
done the greatest service any man
can render.
The personal liberty of an individual
is restricted every day because the ma
| jorty think that il should be.
Is the Herald serious? No man
with any conception of American in
stitutlons would suggest law, to
restrict personal liberty, except on
the theory that it secures to each
citizen the same freedom of individ-
ual action that others enjoy. In a
free government personal liberty is
never restricted except to prevent
one citizen from infringing the
rights of others, and our friend
greatly mistakes if he supposes men
are in the penitentiary unless they
have violated the rights of other
men.
The Prohibitionists in the exercise OF
their personal liberty to do what they
think best for themselves and the pub
lie generally, propose, if they can, to
prevent the sale of liquor.
In other words you propose to pre-
vent other men from doing as they
please; you propose to compel other
men to adopt your views and live as
you order them: and this is your
idea of personal liberty. 1t is evil
dent that your notion Of personal
liberty consists in having the power
to compel other men to act according
as you think they should act. You
wish to prevent the manufacture and
sale of liquor because it is hurtiul
to the man who drinks it. You pro
pose to dictate to other men as 4 pa.
rent dictates 10 his child. Am not
/, grown man, as well able tojudge
for myself as you are to judge fol
me? By what right do yoa claim tC
be wiser, or more righteous than Ii
Excuse me. / do not wish n master
l prefer 10 be my own master | dc
not want Government which will
treat me on tie supposition that
am incapable of judging for myself
about my private habits.
We cndeavored, by question, tC
bring the Herald to a point where il
could see the distinction between 9
law to protect man against himself
and a law to prevent one man from
infringing on the rights of others
We put the question:
If the Herald takes a drink in his
private house in Brooke. does he in.
fringe on my personal rights mere in
Jefferson.
The answer is q violent TRADE
against barrooms. Let this TRADE
be carefully read: it admirably illus
trates the difference between the IA
naticism of prohibition and the calm
logic of the equally sincere friends Of
temperance who advocate local op
ton. The editor of the Herald is
the recognized head and front of the
extreme prohibition idea IN this
State and its ablest advocate: if 9
simple question provokes this mean
ingless TRADE Of empty denunciatior
from the leader Of prohibition
what can we expect from his less in
telligent followers? Is it safe to fol
low such men? Prohibition means
that such unreasoning enthusiasts
shall dictate our private habits
If such men gain the mastery, is il
likely they will stop with the attempt